Up to +15 or so? Int+Magic Theory of 15 is probably on the extreme side, especially at the character's introduction. Over time one could get to that level, but it takes a lot of time and a lot of effort on the part of the assistant.
I have long thought that the Failed Apprentice should have his choice of assignments and could easily acquire vis and/or items in return for his services.
I don't see how. An apprentice is property of a magus. A failed apprentice can no longer be taught and isn't an apprentice any longer and has no rights under the Code. They are free to make their own way in the world.
Enlightened self-interest? Have you seen how Tribunals are structured? A Failed Apprentice or a former magus does have rights as a mundane, and could cause all kinds of problems for the magus who abuses such poor folk.
Sure, it happens when you take a familiar... But as to something else similar in play, well, it would require a fair bit of role play, IMO.
In my sagas, I typically anyone with a supernatural virtue or flaw to benefit from a longevity ritual by dividing by 5. And warping from the LR will happen to a failed apprentice, he's not fully attuned to the magic realm, so he will develop flaws and virtues as his Warping score increases...
You can use the archetypical Bonisagus lab rat template, who unfortunately burned out before they became a full-fledged PC lab rat:
[0] Int +3
[1] Failed Apprentice
[1] Pussiant Magic Theory
[1] Affinity with Magic Theory
With that setup, the character only "natively" has a high intelligence and an Affinity for Magic Theory. Which I admit is slightly optimized, but certainly fits into the concept of a Bonisagus burn-out. It does require 150 XP in magic theory; if you go by the core rules, your Grog will have to be 36 or older to get that, depending on how you determine Affinity interacts with the "maximum ability level" chart. However, that's a bit of a worst-case scenario, and ignores the likelihood that said grog will likely have access to tractus to improve his ability.
If you allow Inventive Genius, swap that out for one of those for an additional +1. If you allow Cyclic Magic (which adds to Lab Totals), swap that out for the other. Obviously, this build is easier if you make them a Companion (Add an additional +2 to Int). EDIT - or the Savantism Flaw, from Grogs, which adds an additional +2 to one Ability Specialization (albeit at a pretty horrendeous cost to anything else.)
But as I said in a later post - +10 is probably more reasonable. That does assume the same age, though (MT 7+1, Int 2).
Mundane rights are protected only insofar as it negatively affects the Order. Stripping a magi of their power, then using an enchanted device to mind control them into being their willing lab assistant, doesn't bring ruin on the Order from an outside force. If anything, it keeps the conflict INSIDE the Order. As to doing so to a failed apprentice? They've likely been a member of the order for years, so their ties to mundane society probably aren't all that great. And even if they are...it's mind control. "Yes, I LOVE working for this magi. He's the greatest!" Problem solved.
Sure, that scenario is a plot point for the grog (or for anyone who wants to rescue the grog). My point is that it seems to be a plausible situation, as Never-EndingWinter pointed out - yet the rules seem to imply that this scenario doesn't occur. So why not?
My take on it is that while normal mundane folk (or even other hedge wizards) can be mind-controlled into obedience, the implied rights of the apprentice/stripped magi would be so rigorously enforced as to be made of diamond, for reasons above: Tribunals don't want their magi going around and destroying the Gift of their peers and then enslaving them. That, more than anything is IMO a reason why ex-apprentices are left alone (plus the whole "that's my child you've got over there.")
EDIT - note that Apprentices comments that those who destroy the Gift of their apprentices are usually charged with Low crimes, and then kicked out of the Tribunal. I don't imagine that the Peripheral Code is any more lenient on those who take advantage of Failed Apprentices, either.
As I said, such a character is on the extreme side. It would be designed only to be a lab assistant and I wouldn't accept it. In fact, failed apprentices have to be companions in my sagas. They have to be interesting, too.
Wouldn't allow any Hermetic virtues, period. And +10 is still on the extreme side for a starting character. Failed apprentice characters I've made have typically started around +6 up to +8 to the lab total. The +8 one was a bit extreme for me, and he doesn't get played very much.
Well, anyone who discovers a means of reliably stripping the Gift from a magus is likely going to be Marched, so I think this is problem is moot.
Well, as I recall the mind control is fairly high level and/or must be cast fairly regularly, and it will likely warp the individual. As I said above, if a magus can reliably destroy the Gift of another, and there's even a hint of that, then he's going to get Marched, or at the very least have dozens of Wizard's Wars declared. But, I don't see it as you do with regards to failed apprentices. I'm not following your logic on the ex-apprentice thing. If the magus destroyed his Gift, why would he be anywhere else, and why would he allow another magus to take him and open up the whole "that's my child you've got over there" thing. Why not, instead, just keep him as a lab assistant? On one hand you have a magus destroying Gifts of other magi and enslaving them, but with apprentices they are allowed to roam free?
Taking advantage of failed apprentices is not anywhere close to being the same thing as deliberately destroying an Apprentice's Gift. I don't recall reading that in Apprentices. I do recall that if an apprentice is abandoned, then it is a low crime, but I can't recall anything negative happening to a magus when his apprentices loses his Gift.
shrug OK. I'm sure that opinion works well IYS, and that those three house rules for addressing what you feel is an unbalanced virtue is certainly valid for your game table.
However, the very fact that you feel the need to houserule it suggests that Failed Apprentice is an excellent addition to this list, albeit for Grogs, rather than Magi.
OK. That prohibits both Hermetic Reputation ("excellent lab assistant") and Personal Vis Source ("payment for services rendered"). It also prevents the game mechanics from reflecting a apprentice's Paren as being particularly skilled or unskilled, or the paren having a bad reputation. Which sounds somewhat arbitrary on your part. But again, your saga, your rules.
Personally, I like to interpret Failed Apprentices as being able to have Gift-related virtues, but only can take advantage of the parts of it that they can still access. Which has the benefit of being a consistent (the character picked up the virtues while Gifted), and also allowing Failed Apprentices to, say, still have game mechanics that reflect the relationship they have with their Parens. Or in this case, work in the lab. - which the rules say they can do. This also matches up with the description of Surpressed Gift, on pg. 59 of Apprentices. Ie, one whose Gift is suppressed, but can still access Supernatural abilities learned via the Gift. This is in contrast to Destroyed Gift, which you can't access those Abilities at all. According to Apprentices, either one of those flaws can lead to the Failed apprentice virtue, whose writeup actually suggests a Supressed Gift, rather than a Destroyed one.
And in terms of having a +10 on a career-based skill: IMS, that's average. They're usually considered specialists at their jobs, so having a decent (+2) attribute modifier in their profession, a relevant virtue for that profession (Puissant, Affinity, Cautious, etc), and the maximum level of skill in their relevant profession, based on age, is considered normal.
[/quote]
Yep - likely a lvl 40 effect. (Base Effect 30, +1 Touch, +1 Conc - use Maintain the Demanding Spell to keep it up for a Moon) Or have it be a Ring duration, and never have him leave the lab. That being said - penetration isn't an issue, and "fear of warping the individual" probably isn't all that big a concern either.
But yes - this is definitely in the category of "crazy old evil Hermetic Wizard doing crazy evil stuff", rather than the average activities of the average, somewhat selfish, mage. My point was to address the idea that it was at least possible, and to contrast this possibility with how magi actually react, according to the write-up.
In looking through apprentices, there are a number of ways to destroy the Gift (pg. 59) - the Amazons can do it, as can Demons, or seriously botching a Turbulence, or REALLY botching a Twilight Comprehension roll. They don't list "Botching the Opening of the Gift", but that's likely because it's at the END of the Apprentice's section, rather than the beginning. However, they don't mention doing it deliberately, with some form of Vim - which I thought there was, but I'm not finding it. (I thought it was a ritual of some sort). Ah well. Temporarily suppressing part of the Gift is possible, though (standard PeVi effect, as described in Intangible Assassin). I don't imagine it would take all that much to make that Instant - but yes, that is currently not described anywhere.
The most common way to destroy an apprentice's gift is by accident - either by botching an Opening of the Ways, or to put your apprentice in a situation where they get so stressed they basically self-destruct (ie Turbulence, or failing a Twilight Comprehension roll). Thus, the Paren will usually either be directly responsible, or else be partially responsible. As such, that sort of guilt-based relationship is much more likely to exist with a paren - and seems to be reflected in the actual Failed Apprentice virtue - ie, the apprentice ISN'T kept in a gilded cage by their paren, but instead is allowed to wander around as a free person.
Apprentices, pg. 35. "A magus responsible for this failure (Inflicting 3 or more deficiencies on an apprentice) faces the loss of his apprentice and banishment from the Tribunal". OK, so that's a way to destroy the Gift deliberately: don't have 5's in any of your Arts when you attempt to open the Gift, thereby inflicting a Deficiency in all 15 Arts. I would imagine that someone who did have 5's could choose to teach sloppily, and deliberately sabotage all 15 Arts...
Anyway - the theory I'm going with is that taking advantage of a failed apprentice is considered a Seriously Bad Thing to do, in order to avoid the slippery slope of wanting to damage an apprentice's Gift so that they remain lab assistants for the rest of their lives.
It's considered a crime to treat your property as merely a lab assistant. (ie, you are required to train them, and then ultimately give them a chance to graduate - you can't keep them prisoner) It doesn't seem unreasonable for it also to be a crime to treat your lab assistant as property.
Not quite. Just the idea that putting Failed Apprentice on a grog makes him a mechanical artifice for boosting a magus's lab total. He's not going to adventure, and he's going to be spending at least two seasons a year in a magus's lab as his assistant. Doubt magi would allow him to go off during the other two seasons to be adventuring, so what is interesting and compelling about the character from a story point of view. And if you push all his XP and virtues into enhancing his lab total, you've only proved my point: it's a way to boost a magus's lab total, and not a compelling character. The house rule doesn't exist only because it's a good virtue (it is, but not necessarily for the character) but because Failed Apprentices should have a background that represents how they were special enough to be picked as an apprentice, in the first place. I don't think you can get there with a grog. Maybe if there was a mid-level uber-grog that had 6 virtue and flaw points...
Well, sure, if the reputation comes as a result of a Hermetic virtue, then yes, it prohibits it. But starting characters do not have a reputation. And Personal Vis Source is something that the character starts the saga with, and can be depended upon. Even if we presume that a Failed Apprentice can't start with this virtue (I think Rival Magic puts this into the Hermetic virtue open to others category, but I digress), receiving payment for services rendered isn't a vis source by any definition I have of a vis source. It's certainly not a virtue if he doesn't received dependable benefit from it, and has to work to be paid...
Well, if the Supernatural ability is acquired via the Gift, and the Gift is destroyed, I agree that the Supernatural ability isn't available anymore. But if it were acquired with a virtue, and that virtue wasn't transformed when the Gift was opened, then I would say that the character could still use the ability if his Gift is later destroyed. But, yes, if you want a failed apprentice character to have access to Hermetic Virtues, I would think that you would rather he's a Companion level character than a grog character, if only to stuff more Hermetic Virtues into his person...
In your saga all starting characters have a +10 at start in areas that they are specialists in?
That's a long way from destroying the Gift, though. The apprentice can still do magic, although certain TeFo combinations will be harder than others, but it's not a destroyed Gift. And then if this really were to happen, one could simply kill the apprentice and probably avoid the issues of the 3 deficient Arts...
There we are in agreement; failed apprentices, IMO should have a lot of power in the relationship they have with the covenant, any bonus be it +5 or +10 would be in high demand by all magi of the covenant, and I can envision high bidding scenarios for his services. And when it comes to the 3rd season he's helping a magus in the lab, well, that one is going to be expensive. ANd the 4th season in a year is going to be a situation where the failed apprentice an virtually name his price...
A lot of people seemed to be implying that my view on how to treat a Failed Apprentice is evil, and I don't believe that to be the case. It might inadvertently encourage evil and illegal behaviour, but it is not itself evil from the perspective of a Hermetic-centric morality like the one Bonisagus seemed to want to encourage. Perhaps the church might call it evil, so it's evil by medieval paradigm, but hey, they also consider the mass slaughter of people who won't convert to be a positive and giving women equal rights a sin, so I'm going to make the personal decision not to consider medieval Christian morals any better than medieval Order of Hermes morals. Your mileage may vary.
Destroying a full-on wizard's Gift and trying to benefit is a lot different from taking advantage of an apprentice whose Gift has been destroyed. Namely, once what I presume is the War is over, the other wizard is still protected by the Code. The apprentice never was, having not sworn the Oath. More importantly, destroying the Gift of a magus who is doing his duty, or intentionally destroying an apprentice's Gift to take advantage of their services, are both significantly more amoral than taking advantage of an apprentice whose Gift was destroyed by no will of your own. That apprentice can not meaningfully contribute to increasing the magical knowledge or power base on his own no matter what, so unless you intend to study his Supernatural Abilities or something (not worth it) then the Hermetic community will benefit the most from somebody having their Lab Totals bolstered by his existence. Sure, it's slightly more morally right to give him appropriate payment and upgraded standard of living in return for his help, but only as much as it would be to do that for any other individual covenfolk in the covenant for their own contributions. I can handle spending four tenths of a pound annually and even making a Longevity Ritual for the assistant if it'll make him happy, but at the end of the day if I can't pay him to help somebody in the Lab (and I'd usually like that to be me, though the action is morally just regardless of which person gets the assistant as long as that person is doing something to benefit the Order) then liberal use of Mentem will be necessary.
When I say "benefits the Order," I don't even mean everybody should be a Bonisagus magus, dedicating their life to improving magic or something. If you leave behind more than you took up or at least tried to do so, you have benefited the Order and are doing your duty. This is, incidentally, why I find the Magical Memory and Harnessed Magic Virtues disgusting, especially used in tandem. If at the end of your natural life you leave behind not a single lab text, nor a single magic item, nor a single trained apprentice, nor any magical discoveries... If you have used up precious vis and spent seasons reading books to the exclusion of somebody else and you leave behind nothing for the Order to benefit from, then your existence was wasted, and you are a thief, a deceiver, and you are taking advantage of a Gift you don't deserve.
That's how I see Hermetic morality, anyway. Obviously exempting unusual circumstances, like a dragon attacking your covenant, killing you, and burning all your contributions. You were attempting to fulfill your duty, and neither incompetence nor horrid bad luck are moral faults.
I need an image macro for my "Hermetic Virtues need an overhaul" complaint. Some Hermetic Virtues can be gotten by people without the Gift (such as Personal Vis Source) and those should be available to Failed Apprentices.
Anyway:
First off, you are not at all required to allow your property to graduate. It is perfectly legal to keep an apprentice for 17 years, not training them at all for the last two, then kill that apprentice. Apprentices are property that have been granted specific rights for the continuation of the Order; the life of the apprentice is not such a right, and even the most egregious cases of abuse are only kept under control by Wizard's War, not the Quaesitores.
Secondly, it's not unreasonable for it to be a crime to treat your lab assistant as property, but it's also not necessary either, and I wouldn't think that most Tribunals would prohibit the use of failed apprentice lab assistants just to patch a loophole that a couple of sharp operators might be using. "Oops, I just have the worst luck with my apprentices..." Of course, I generally assume that, maybe outside of a couple of Tribunals (the Thebans take a much dimmer view of apprentice abuse than the Rhine), the Order is really not that together as an organization and has plenty of loopholes and gray areas to be settled by politicking, certamen or Wizard's War, so YSMV.
Huh? Except as required by one's House (which means Bonisagus by Code and Mercere by tradition, and sort-of Guernicus and Flambeau), no magus has any duty to aid the Order so long as they don't transgress the Code; even the requirement to slay one's apprentice has been handwaved, as has the vow to take and train apprentices (other magi will do it if you don't). If a magus wants to study on their own, suck up personally-claimed vis and leave nothing to anyone else, that's their right; plenty of eremites and even covenants do just that (though it's easier to do this in some Tribunals than others). "Hermetic morality," such as it is, is about keeping a bunch of sociopathic demigods from killing each other.
Morally upstanding and legally upstanding are both positive ratings, but on two different scales. I think a magus has a moral duty to leave something behind, even if all that is is just lab texts for other people to use or something. Each magus might leave behind different things of different value, but that's okay; you give within your means without making your situation worse. However, while it's certainly and unquestionably legal, I consider it to be a moral transgression to not leave anything behind. Imagine, if you will, a world where stealing is legal; I consider intentionally not expanding the base of power, knowledge, or material in the Order over the course of your lifetime to be akin to being raised by a group who were so busy keeping you fed that they were forced to let a (admittedly usually abusive) nanny raise you for the first few years of your life, and then raised you from there on themselves without doing anything bad to you if you just sat around and rewarding you with nice things and attention when you did something positive for them, except that instead of helping keep people from stealing from them or even averting your eyes and just allowing it to happen, you actively took advantage of other people stealing from them as a distraction so you could steal from them. It wouldn't be illegal, and it wouldn't surprise or even really spark negative feelings from anybody in a world like that, but it would still be wrong from a moral standpoint. And honestly, it's a fitting analogy; as a Hermetic magus, you almost have to be trying to leave nothing behind in order to actually leave nothing behind. Even Magical Memory doesn't prevent you from leaving behind Lab Texts and doing so takes no extra time, so there's really no reason not to except to deny other magi access to them in the future.
Eh. I think you're getting way too into character, as well as pushing a specific (Transitionalist) viewpoint that a lot of magi are going to think you insane for suggesting (and a lot will think your position doesn't go far enough). I'm not going to pass any OOC moral judgment on how the Order "should" function or how magi "should" conduct themselves. However, if you want an actual counterargument, let me pull up my inner Guernicus:
The Order doesn't own a magus' books. It doesn't (except in Normandy Tribunal, and that's a result of Tytalus meddling) own vis sources. Durenmar is open to all magi, but access must be paid for. So eremites aren't stealing anything. They paid for their apprenticeship by fifteen years of service (which they weren't, by the way, given the option to refuse). They paid for access to any books they use, either by participating in a covenant or by trading for access. Any vis they use, they either claimed for themselves, bartered for, or seized by lawful use of force. No theft is involved (except in the case of taking vis in lawful combat, and again, that is a magus' right, paid for by the right of other magi to do the same to him), so your thought experiment relies on a fallacious comparison.
Furthermore, except for House Bonisagus' duty to spread knowledge, and their right to seize apprentices, the Order levies no tax or duty on its members. A magus pays for the protection of the Code by following the Code; a Quaesitor or Hoplite is paid for his services from the assets seized by his actions. So with that said, except as the Code, his House, or his covenant charter requires, a magus has neither legal nor moral obligation to assist the Order. Would a better magus use his skills for the benefit of the Order, sending Lab Texts to Durenmar, providing magical items to his sodales, training apprentices, making and disseminating Breakthroughs, serving as a Quaesitor or Hoplite, participating in competitions for glory or Wizard's Marches, and otherwise being a good citizen of the Order? Aye, and we honor and reward such magi. But there is neither a moral nor a legal duty to do so, and no shame ought to fall on a magus who keeps to himself, asks for nothing from the Order and returns nothing. Such was Guernicus' intent, when he himself agreed to be the first Quaesitor.
Sure, some magi might be like this, but why must all be so?
As Ramidel said, I think this is a character's feeling and shouldn't be a player feeling. If it is, I think it creates problems at the table. Mag are generally described as selfish, and even relationships among their fellow covenant members may be tense, at least they can't all be cordial, otherwise there wouldn't be a term for cordial relationships between magi (amicus/amica).
Well if my magi leave something behind it's going to whomever they wish it to go to or House Tremere, if they are Tremere. But it's a choice, and I don't think that most magi will feel it is a moral duty to leave the Order better than they found it. Even Bonisagus, who are supposed to share their information for the benefit for the Order do this begrudgingly, only by sending things to Durenmar. Durenmar then charges those who visit for access.
And there is a reason both in the meta-game and in the game world itself that most Covenant Charters include provisions for compulsory service to the Covenant. Magi will generally work to better themselves, and not necessarily the covenant as a whole, even if over the long term improving the covenant will improve their lot. A lot of my magi have near term objectives of getting projects and learning desired spells and would rather pursue that instead of covenant service. And this is just as the covenant level. At the Tribunal and Order levels, such public service is usually the result of being found guilty of some low crime.